End Cap

Mitch Albom called for the … I dunno, firing? of Andrew Breitbart in his column on Sunday. He tirelessly railed against Breitbart for at least two days on his radio show.

Of course, bloggers can’t be fired, so that’s why Albom advocates journalism be returned to the bosom of those who have “standards.” You know, those who attended J-school.

Some people have called this incident a referendum on racism. I don’t think so. It was a referendum on editing. A referendum on Internet blogging. A referendum on our blazing desire for explosive moments — even out of context — and our creeping slowness to see the full picture.

Yes, Albom is the voice of moderation. PTL he always keeps things in context and never takes someone’s words out of context.

All of this will soon be forgotten, thankfully, and the charming and efficient pundits of Washington, D.C. will go back to observing the “racist” Tea Party movement and that stupid conservatives aren’t stupid but “neo-fascists.” And we’ll be back to business as usual.

But now, of course, we know that “serious” journalists consider it a crime when words are taken out of context. Right?

Oops. DAMN, I found more. Doc Zero has a bit to say about it all. On Sherrods accusations of the racist motivations of conservatives opposing Obama’s healthcare:

She probably didn’t appreciate the irony of reflexively using a false accusation of racism to suppress dissent against the enormous power grab perpetrated by the Democrats in their health-care bill. False accusations of racism in the service of tyranny are themselves a profoundly racist act: There is no legitimate dissent from the President’s usurpation of our liberties. All such dissent is a result of the ugly prejudice baked into white cracker genes.